The World Moves On...
 

Do you think that during the election campaign,
it is alright to put aside other world issues in order
to focus on winning the election? Do you think that
during this time period America ignores outside issues?
Have Bush and Kerry put aside their responsibillities in
order to campaign?

Both Kerry and Edwards have, hence the many, many, Senate meetings they have missed.

Also Bush: We have not seen any new policies implemented, or decisions for that matter, since the beginning of the campaign. I think the rest of the world also kind of drops what it's doing to watch our election.

They missed alot of votes when they weren't busy trying to get elected into other offices, as well.

This is a good point to keep in mind when voting: I think this fact shows that Kerry and Edwards are more concerned with personal gain than the wellfare of the country.

Kind of late to point that out now, isn't it?

Also, their not doing much isn't really a bad thing, all things considered. I'd rather have someone who does nothing, thus fucking nothing up, than someone who tries to fuck things up (even if he doesn't have the support to do so), and gives tax breaks that ONLY help the rich (dividend tax breaks, the property tax break [which he advertised as helping poor farmers, except poor farmers were already completely protected from that tax, only the rich had to pay it]) while driving our national debt higher and higher, destroying jobs just to later create a lesser amount of lower paying jobs, turning the biggest out pouring of international support we've ever had into one of the biggest outpourings of international hatred etc. etc.

The only thing that can be SERIOUSLY argued he did well were the wars themselves, and even that can be argued back and forth until people are blue in the face.

So, in the end, I'd rather have a do-nothing, than a do-nothing-right.

You really are smarter than that, so act like it. EVERYBODY had their taxes cut, the bottom bracket(sp?) cut first from 15% to 10%, the top one(which you need less than $80,000 a year to get into) won't be cut till either next year, or 2006(I forgot). A property tax break would help poorer people to own houses if they wanted to, though I must admit I like having an apartment with paid utilities and no property tax(on me at least). Dividend taxes were just bullshit, plain and simple(BTW many poor workers[such as Wal-Mart employees] get stock benefits).

But that stock is usually in a 401K which is already tax free. The dividend tax primarily affects the upper classes because they are the only group that has large amounts of stock outside a 401K.

Yes everyone did have a tax cut, but according to Bushes ten year plan 50% of all tax cuts will be given to the top 1%. And you also must remember that the top 1% get a piece of all the other tax breaks due to the tax bracket system.

Supply side economics is his excuse for this. A system I feel is deeply logically flawed and the result of either ignorance of economics, or something far more sinister.

The stock benefits program is not a 401k.

You got those numbers from where now? The top bracket(again you need less than $80,000 a year to get into it[as in FAR FROM the richest 1%]) at the end will be cut from 39.6% to 36%, the bottom already went from 15% to 10%(I can't recall the cuts for the other brackets right now). So the poor get a 5% tax cut, and the $80,000+ a year people get 3.6%(not to mention the cuts for all the other brackets between) and you're saying that the $1,000,000+ a year people get more than 50% of it how now?

Cut taxes on the rich and it won't neccessarily help the little man yes, but raising taxes on the rich will hurt him for sure, since the rich are the ones giving him his paycheck if you hurt them then it will come down on him. Being stingy they won't neccesarily raise his wages when they get a tax cut though.

Bush is just caught in a long chain of sucking up to the wealthy: after all, our entire nation is based on who has the most money. For years, administration after administration have passed laws and amendments that are really just cleverly worded loophools to get the rich out of paying taxes. I'm glad Bush was not as subtle as previous presidents about lowering taxes for the financially inclined. Maybe now, this artistocratic system of finding ways to lower taxes for the rich will finally recieve the attention and critisism it so richly deserves.